Posted on 11/01/2008 8:07:13 AM PDT by jerod
Well... Are you?
Sitting laughing!
I just read this to my husband. He laughed and said it would be good for the country. :-)
The fairness doctrine will never pass the Senate absent a filibuster-proof majority by the Democrats ... and that looks very unlikely.
This is just left-wing campaing bluster ... people will be shocked at how little a President can get done, even with Congress on his side.
H
Killing Rush on AM radio would be a major death blow to us all,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yes, it would, even though I get irritated with him for being so wimpy.
Grass roots wise, conservatives would pour major money to fight this because this will cost powerful people billions. Billions upon billions. Now I am not advocating the next sentence, in any way shape or form, simply stating a fact.........when billions are involved it can become dangerous to human life. You can imagine the rest.
Laughing????
One of the primary reasons that Reagan, Bush and Bush got elected is because of conservative commentary. If that commentary is squelched, you’ll never get a Republican elected again. And yes, they can control your internet and airwaves.
As for the Supreme Court, they have a lot of power, but the power of a President trumps their rulings.
The only reason Clinton wasn’t convicted in the Senate is because those 100 Senators knew that Clinton would say ‘Screw You’. Then what would they have done?
The President of your country is all powerful, and putting an egotistic, left-wing, Marxist loving President in power can be a very dangerous move on your part.
Do not elect Obama. You will surely regret it.
Have you heard Mark Levin on this subject?
If the Messiah wins, we will have to fight to keep our voices. How about millions of phone calls, letters, and emails? How about Rush TELLING listeners to contact their elected representatives?
You do realize you’re preaching to the choir?
Have to do that anonymously of course, but it wouldn't hurt to remind some of these pukes who think they are immortal.
Maybe remind them a bit more subtly than that of course, but in a way that they get the picture.
Actually, I am not laughing. You can be certain that if there was even a hint of the Fairness Doctrine I would be out there lobbying and working against it. Our nation's very survival depends on a free conservative press.
But,...Honestly, the internet is a very big distraction and very addictive for me. (likely due to its intermittent positive reinforcement) I would get a lot more work done without it. My house would be cleaner. I would be spending more time with the family. The family would be treated to more homemade bread, and I would be developing other talents ( maybe even the mandolin). :-)
I hope you understand that I was sharing a joke with Tax Chick.
Actually, I’m preaching to those Conservatives out there who assume that a Barry Obama Presidency will be short and sweet with a huge Conservative victory in 4 years. Those who will skip the polls in favor of some Reagan like Conservative messiah in 4 years.
It ain’t going to happen.
You must not allow an extreme liberal to gain power, while the congress is controlled by extreme liberals. Very bad things may happen.
You’ll need every vote you can get to defeat Barry O.
You must not allow an extreme liberal to gain power,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I’m singing harmony with you bro’!
Who knows maybe he will just be a black Jimmy Carter incompetent but gone in 4 miserable danger-filled years.
That's what I originally thought about him, I viewed Hillary as the greater danger. I thought she was the real “true believer” in socialist paradise. Now I think she is just another corrupt limousine liberal “brie & white wine socialist” who is there primarily to soak the treasury. Corruption we can survive, the more I have read about and listened to Obama the more I convinced he is a creature of William Ayers and the Weather Underground, therefore I am very afraid.
Unfortunately for us, whether it’s the radio airways or the MSM, it all depends on who the people are that judge whether something is fair or not. It’s so subjective.
About a year ago, Rush talked about the fairness doctrine coming back and he said he had plans for this and not to worry. He hasn’t mentioned those plans lately and things have gotten more ominous. I know they/we’ll fight it but maybe he does have other plans.
I honestly can’t imagine a world without a Daily Rush.
Exactly :-). In real life, people just want me to give them food and let them play computer games and do the laundry so they can wear the same set of clothes every day. Here, people think I'm clever!
Disclaimer: I wouldn't expect the current crop of democrats to enact a really fair Fairness Doctrine, just wondering.
We'll demand our piece of the pie.
Most conservatives that may be eligible for food stamps or other assistance still prefer to remain self-sufficient. If the left gains full control we could overload even the current government handout system, forcing them to drop plans to increase handouts.
Two words: Pirate Radio.
Also, digital cameras and recordable DVDs. The Russians called it “samizdat”, messages passed hand to hand, bypassing the government controlled media. They used mimeographs and homemade printing presses, but I think we can do a little better. This might even be a good thing, if it brings people face to face a little more often.
The FCC during the LBJ years implemented a thing called the Fairness Doctine.
Under FCC rules with the force of law, any talk show that presented views on any controversial issue of public importance had to present all views on the subject in the same program. Failure to do so put the station that carried the program in violation of the law. Punishment was heavy fines and loss of the radio station license.
Thus Rush’s show would have to include every liberal and independent view in addition to Rush’s views.
What was a Controversial Issue or public Importance? The FCC would not tell you until after they found you guilty of violating the Rule.
Ronald Reagan appointed FCC members that overturned the fairness doctrine in 1988. From 1964 util 1988 Rush’s show would have been illegal. And any station that broadcast it would have been severly fined and had their station license revoked.
Not a station in the USA dared carry a political talk show of any stripe. All it took was one listener to complain that the show did not contain his view on the issue and the station license was toast.
If you go back and read some of Reagans radio scripts from the 1970s you will see how clever he was at avoiding the so called fairness doctrine and you will understand why there were many things he could not say.
His win is the best proof that it isn’t needed. If right wing talk radio has so much influence then how would he have won?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.